The Google Glass Impression

You have to agree to the fact that – technology has been penetrating our day to day lives at unbelievable speeds. The moment we get used to an intrusion on one end of our social space (real social – not facebook/twitter social), another frontier of it seems to have faced a breach. There is an intense competition between brands to get their products on the top shelf of our lives.

Companies constantly expand their boundaries, create new markets with technologies that promise to power our lives with ease of communication, easy creation of data, seamless access to the same data, and much more. Google Glass – is a product from one of these expansions. A company dominant in the internet space, created a strong hold on the Mobile market and now breaching the not-so-existent market of “Always connected” devices. Google Glass is a giant leap. Not so much from a technology perspective as much as the experience. Experience for both – the user, and the people around the user.

There has been a long debate over how Google Glass will be received; if it will ever fit into our daily social interactions, or will it simply reflect as just another too ahead of it’s time technology. I believe that Google Glass will slowly blend into our society, as a general tool of convenience (or luxury) with just the right kind of execution. If Google Glass does succeed – it wont be the first one of its kind.

glass

We have obviously seen atleast one such technology that could make one look dorky to the untrained eye. Glass shall blend smoothly in our daily lives, provided that it makes a debut in the market with a sufficiently wide customer base. It has be there around us enough for us to adjust to it quickly.

“If an untrained eye, spots a person wearing Google Glass – and that person remains to be the only one wearing Glass around for more than a week or two, he is subject to being viewed as a dork.”

The argument around Glass, was that it gave out a negative impression about the user. People, not being used to seeing a person with a miniature screen hovering over his face, are prone to judge. But this is not the first wearable technology we have come across. We have easily accepted headphones as wearable devices. Bluetooth headsets have penetrated our social interactions well enough. The dork factor on a bluetooth headset is debatable, but they have found their own place, and can definitely not be termed as a failure. For people who compare Segways and Google Glass; there is not valid argument here. Segways have a far less utility/dork-factor ratio than what Glass does. I’ll leave the the explanation of Segways to @paulg; he has done it better – Paul Graham on why Segways didn’t make it big.

Headphones, or Bluetooth headsets both were found around the market for a price payable by most. This affects the acceptance a lot. You get to see it all around you – and you tend to accept it, because everyone agrees with it. Once they become a normal sight, people barely notice it. In layman’s terms – the first kid to wear prescription glasses at school usually appears to be odd to the peers (Don’t judge me – I have had prescription glasses since early in school), and possibly subjected to bullying. As more of them come in, it becomes a regular sight and you barely notice it. My analogy might not perfectly fit in, but it runs close to the case here.

To sum it up, what matters is – how frequently will you see a person wearing Glass around you? If people around you don’t get a sufficient enough dose of Glassware Glasswear you might risk being framed as a dork. In that case, you might want to move to a Glass friendly neighborhood.